|
Post by youcantry on Mar 8, 2013 12:04:59 GMT 10
Isengard, despite taking sheep, most now agree the thylacine's natural prey would have been very small compared to body size. I'd suggest possums and birds would be on the menu. The coastal strip in the south has a milder climate than inland, and the additional food source of whatever washes up from the sea. But on the flipside, there's better visibility for being spotted or tracked there by humans. Not that there have been too many humans there looking since about the 1940s. But I'm aware of at least one report of evidence on the SW coast, one sighting in 1982, and more evidence inland in the south west. Point being - small prey may have been sufficient. Stripes tends to imply forested areas though.
|
|
|
Post by youcantry on Mar 8, 2013 12:26:39 GMT 10
The question is, who that someone is going to be? Hm. My limiting factors, I suppose, are time and money, just like anyone else's.
|
|
|
Post by Isengard on Mar 10, 2013 20:03:22 GMT 10
Presumably thylacines can eat rabbits ok and if these areas are as we say they are then there should be enough prey species for a population. It all sounds promising! The big 'but' as I see it is why if they persisted in this region unnoticed have they not recovered enough in population for them to spread again and begin to be noticed, or did the population sink so low that they are clinging on and they are simply too small in number to recover?
|
|
arca
Knight Errant
Posts: 65
|
Post by arca on Mar 11, 2013 2:59:33 GMT 10
What about Mooney's argument that the abundance of prey like wallabies suggests that the thylacine population should have recovered by now, if any had been left?
|
|
|
Post by molloch on Mar 11, 2013 15:41:40 GMT 10
There are a lot of pademelons (small wallabies) in Tassie, but they are concentrated on the borders of grazing land and bush, not something that occurs in the SW. One thing I noticed this time is the reduction of populations of small mammals. When I was in Tassie 10 years ago compared to this visit (I arrived back in Melbourne yesterday), there were many more potoroos, bettongs and bandicoots. I saw each of these animals this time, but in far, far fewer numbers than last time.
There is some suggestion that this is the effect of removing devils, which in turn has increased the number of cats. This is certainly a possibility, with bettongs restricted to the Eastern half of the island anyway, and poor habitat for potoroos in the NW where the devil populations are still high. Bandicoots are a bit more of a puzzle. 10 years ago, they were everywhere. Very easy to spot on the roadsides at night, and lots of road kill. This time I had to hunt for them, and only saw around 5-6 dead on the roads. They seemed more common in town than out in the scrub. There is certainly abundant wildlife in Tassie, but the numbers seem to be quite diminished since I was last there. Not sure if there is anything official on this.
|
|
|
Post by youcantry on Mar 13, 2013 14:36:05 GMT 10
One thing I noticed this time is the reduction of populations of small mammals. When I was in Tassie 10 years ago compared to this visit (I arrived back in Melbourne yesterday), there were many more potoroos, bettongs and bandicoots. I saw each of these animals this time, but in far, far fewer numbers than last time. See??!! That's how many tigers there are! They're wiping the place out!! ;D
|
|